Where should they build the new UW campus?

Higher ed reporter Amy Rolph has this on the battle heating up over where the University of Washington will build its new north campus:

You can almost see the mud flying through the air as the battle to land the University of Washington’s north campus heats up in Snohomish County, with recent accusations that the two Everett sites under consideration are toxic dumps.

That allegation is leveled by “Real Huskies Go North,” an advocacy group trying to persuade state officials to build the new campus in north Marysville. A state Department of Ecology report listing the two sites as high priorities for clean up is posted on the group’s Web site, which underwent some confusing changes Thursday.

At a town meeting in Everett on Wednesday, Everett officials objected to something about the “Real Huskies Go North” site — though what the true nature of that objection was seems to have somehow been lost in translation (see story).

Pat McLain, Everett’s governmental affairs director, told the P-I it was the Department of Ecology’s report city officials had a problem with, since contamination at both sites are “are clean or about to be clean.” Problems with the two sites stem from their former use as a log yard and a saw mill, he said.

But Charla Neuman, a spokeswoman for the north Snohomish advocacy group, said if the city is cleaning the site up, it should let the Department of Ecology know; the agency’s most recent report released earlier this month doesn’t show a change, she said.

“Interestingly enough, no one disputed the actual information,” she said, later commenting: “It’s very clear that there is no clean-up going on. If they have new plans, that’s great. But then the question is how long before they know the extent of the clean up, how much it will cost and who will pay for clean up?”

Everett officials’ complaints weren’t about the contamination report — just the images used to illustrate the group’s toxic-take on the land, she said.

The Web site included non-specific photos of workers in protective suits working with oil-drums presumably filled with toxic waste, and a clip-art-style graphic of a skull and crossbones.

Neuman sent out a news release about the Web site’s alterations late Wednesday afternoon, and later that day, she said the design was modified as a courtesy to Everett — not because it was misleading.

“That doesn’t even make sense,” McLain said.

He said the “go north” group hasn’t sought any information from Everett about efforts to clean the sites up. “It doesn’t seem to be important to them,” he said.

Four possible sites — including one in Lake Stevens — are under consideration, whittled down from 84 possibilities. State officials with the Office of Financial Management will make recommendations to the governor and Legislature on Nov. 15.

What do you think? Which location is best for students in the northern part of the state?